welovetrump--2020-01-31--Michael Flynn’s Lawyer Says Govt “Framed and Set-up” Flynn, Moves To Have Entire Case Dismissed

The Federalist has much more in a deep dive : Yesterday , Michael Flynn ’ s legal team , led by powerhouse attorney Sidney Powell , filed a “ Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty ” on behalf of the retired lieutenant general .
Between the motion and the accompanying exhibits , which together exceeded 200 pages , Powell exposed several more troubling details about the prosecution of Flynn , involving both the special counsel team and Flynn ’ s previous attorneys .
Flynn had pled guilty on December 1 , 2017 , to one count of making a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Joe Pientka when the duo questioned Flynn on January 24 , 2017 about telephone conversations he had with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak .
At the time Flynn entered his plea , he was represented by Robert Kelner and Stephen Anthony of the well-respected Washington firm of Covington and Burling , LLP .
Kelner and Anthony continued to represent Flynn until he fired them in June 2019 and replaced them with Powell .
Powell sought a delay in Flynn ’ s sentencing , which had already been postponed from December 2018 .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to produce previously withheld evidence , including a copy of the transcript and audio of the January 24 , 2017 , telephone call .
In mid-December 2019 , presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan denied Powell ’ s motion to compel and set Flynn ’ s sentencing for January 28 , 2020 .
Sullivan also directed the government to submit an updated sentencing memorandum , which it did .
In its updated sentencing memorandum , the prosecutor backtracked on its previous position that Flynn had provided substantial assistance to the government and then government attorneys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduction in sentence .
That was a problem , though , because the government had pledged in the plea agreement to file a motion for a substantial assistance , leading Powell to file on Flynn ’ s behalf a motion to withdraw his guilty plea based on the government ’ s breach of the plea agreement .
In that motion , Powell noted there were additional grounds for a plea withdrawal , which she would present in a forthcoming motion .
Adding to Reasons for Withdrawing His Plea Judge Sullivan provided Powell a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arguments .
While Powell missed the deadline by 50 minutes due to computer problems , she sought leave to file the late motion yesterday .
While Flynn ’ s original motion to withdraw rested on the government ’ s breach of the plea agreement , Flynn ’ s supplemental motion to withdraw his guilty plea relied on Flynn ’ s claim that his Covington lawyers provided ineffective assistance of counsel .
Flynn ’ s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel proves important , legally , because a court need not allow a defendant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , under federal law , a defendant may withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing only “ if the defendant can show a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.
” In determining whether a “ fair and just reason ” exists , courts consider three factors : “ ( 1 ) whether the defendant has asserted a viable claim of innocence ; ( 2 ) whether the delay between the guilty plea and the motion to withdraw has substantially prejudiced the government ’ s ability to prosecute the case ; and ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ somehow tainted.
” Powell ’ s brief walked through these three factors , stressing first that Flynn is innocent of the charge that he lied to the FBI .
Powell ’ s analysis of this factor followed her opening plea to Judge Sullivan to recall that “ more than a year ago , at the December 18 , 2018 , Sentencing Hearing , this Court declared that it could not ‘ recall any incident in which the Court has ever accepted a plea of guilty from someone who maintained that he was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not ‘ intend to start ’ that day.
” Next , Powell argued that there is no prejudice to the government ’ s ability to prosecute the case .
No witnesses have died , no evidence has been lost , and the prosecution remains equally able to make out its case—if it had one—now as at the time Flynn entered his guilty plea .
Finally , Powell addressed the heart of the issue : the third factor and whether Flynn ’ s plea was somehow tainted .
It was , Powell posited , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Flynn received both at his December 2017 plea hearing and again when Sullivan quizzed him about his guilt at the December 2018 sentencing hearing .
After setting out the governing legal standard for ineffective assistance of counsel—that “ counsel ’ s advice was not ‘ within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases , ’ and that as a result he was prejudiced , i.e .
‘ there is a reasonable probability that , but for counsel ’ s errors , he would not have pleaded guilty and would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ —Powell dedicates the remaining 30-plus pages of her brief to proving Flynn ’ s Covington lawyers provided ineffective assistance to Flynn .
In arguing that Flynn ’ s prior attorneys provided ineffective assistance of counsel , Powell first hammers the conflicts of interest facing the Covington lawyers .
Here , Powell stresses a mistake she alleges Kelner made in handling the legal work for Flynn ’ s Foreign Agent Registration Act ( FARA ) filings : Kelner inaccurately informed the government that Flynn had initiated an op-ed concerning Turkey , when Flynn had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partner , Bijan Rafiekian , had drafted the op-ed .
Powell then notes that internal communications showed the Covington lawyers were discussing “ among themselves their own potential civil and criminal FARA liability , ” and the “ substantial ‘ headline risks.
’ ” Simultaneously , it seems from the briefing , the Covington team was looking to market itself and its FARA services following resolution of the Flynn case .
These conflicts , Powell argued , could not be waived .
But even if Flynn could have waived Covington ’ s conflicts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an informed consent to allow Covington to continue to represent him , Powell posited .
Here , Powell highlighted some troubling facts .
Although Flynn ’ s Covington lawyer first received a call from special counsel prosecutor Brandon Van Grack on October 31 , 2017 , demanding a meeting with Flynn ’ s lawyers , it was not until November 19 , 2017 , when Covington sent Flynn a written request for him to consent to their representation notwithstanding a “ potential ” conflict of interest .
But before then , on November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Covington lawyers , the special counsel highlighted what it saw as Flynn criminal exposure for “ ( 1 ) FARA ( failure to register ) ; ( 2 ) FARA false statements ; and ( 3 ) false statements to government officials.
” Van Grack also informed the Covington lawyers of the special counsel ’ s possible interest in their own testimony .
That letter claimed Covington had already discussed the conflict with Flynn , but the only other time it was raised , according to Flynn , was a passing reference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue I want to bring up , ” Van Grack said .
“ Because Covington prepared the FARA registration , that would make you [ Kelner ] a fact witness.
” “ If we were to get to that point , we would litigate it very aggressively.
” Kelner retorted , “ We saw what you guys did with [ Paul ] Manafort , and we ’ ll definitely raise it with our client.
” However , according to Flynn ’ s motion , Kelner did not raise the conflict of interest at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back-and-forths with the special counsel ’ s office , Covington arranged for their client to sit down and talk with Robert Mueller ’ s prosecutors on November 16 , 2017 .
That morning , government lawyer Van Grack called Anthony “ to discuss whether they had talked with Mr. Flynn about the conflict.
” In summarizing the call for Kelner , the partner noted there was “ Nothing to worry about .
They wanted to ask what they ’ d previously asked : have we considered and disclosed to the client ( a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being a fact witness and ( b ) Covington ’ s own interest with respect to its prior advice to [ Flynn ] regarding FARA—and that the client is OK proceeding with us ?
Answer : yes.
” Flynn answered questions for the government for the next two days and then , the afternoon before he was to sit down for the third day of questioning , Covington emailed the request for Flynn ’ s “ informed consent ” on its conflict of interest .
That letter included the CYA claim that Covington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the only other time it was raised , according to Flynn , was a passing reference to a conflict when his business partner was indicted .
This Was Not Informed Consent While Flynn responded to Covington ’ s request for “ informed consent ” that he was very confident in the team and trusted them , in the motion to withdraw his plea , Powell stresses that the request came too late and was ineffective to inform Flynn of the extent of the conflict .
And “ absent the actual secret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former counsel : ( i ) he would have terminated Covington in August 2017 ; ( ii ) he would not have gone into the proffer ; ( iii ) he would not have pled guilty in 2017 ; and , ( iv ) he would have withdrawn his plea in 2018 , ” Flynn maintains .
Before Flynn signed the plea , he ‘ specifically instructed Anthony and Kelner to call [ the Special Counsel ] immediately and ask if the agents believed that he lied.
’ Beyond the conflict of interest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covington ’ s representation , the most serious of which is her claim that the Covington lawyers did not inform Flynn that on November 30 , 2017 , the day before he pleaded guilty , the special counsel ’ s office “ disclosed to Covington that ‘ one of the agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn was being investigated by the DOJ Inspector General ’ and had electronic communications that ‘ showed a preference for one of the candidates for President.
’ ” Flynn also asserts that his attorneys did not inform him that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the agents said Mr. Flynn had a ‘ sure demeanor , ’ and ‘ did not give any indicators of deception ’ and that the agents ‘ had the impression at the time that Mr. Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.
’ ” Here , Powell also stressed that before Flynn signed the plea , he “ specifically instructed Anthony and Kelner to call [ the Special Counsel ] immediately and ask if the agents believed that he lied .
However , when Kelner and Anthony returned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about to sign the plea agreement , they did not inform the Flynns that Van Grack said , ‘ both agents said ‘ they saw no indication of deception , ’ he had ‘ a sure demeanor , ’ and they ‘ did not believe he was lying or he did not believe he was lying.
’ ” Instead , according to Flynn , they said “ the agents stood by their statement .
”

The Federalist has much more in a deep dive:
Yesterday, Michael Flynn’s legal team, led by powerhouse attorney Sidney Powell, filed a “Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty” on behalf of the retired lieutenant general. Between the motion and the accompanying exhibits, which together exceeded 200 pages, Powell exposed several more troubling details about the prosecution of Flynn, involving both the special counsel team and Flynn’s previous attorneys.
Flynn had pled guilty on December 1, 2017, to one count of making a false statement to FBI agents Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka when the duo questioned Flynn on January 24, 2017 about telephone conversations he had with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. At the time Flynn entered his plea, he was represented by Robert Kelner and Stephen Anthony of the well-respected Washington firm of Covington and Burling, LLP.
Kelner and Anthony continued to represent Flynn until he fired them in June 2019 and replaced them with Powell. Powell sought a delay in Flynn’s sentencing, which had already been postponed from December 2018. She then sought to compel the federal prosecutors to produce previously withheld evidence, including a copy of the transcript and audio of the January 24, 2017, telephone call.
In mid-December 2019, presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan denied Powell’s motion to compel and set Flynn’s sentencing for January 28, 2020. Sullivan also directed the government to submit an updated sentencing memorandum, which it did. In its updated sentencing memorandum, the prosecutor backtracked on its previous position that Flynn had provided substantial assistance to the government and then government attorneys withdrew a previously filed motion for a reduction in sentence.
That was a problem, though, because the government had pledged in the plea agreement to file a motion for a substantial assistance, leading Powell to file on Flynn’s behalf a motion to withdraw his guilty plea based on the government’s breach of the plea agreement. In that motion, Powell noted there were additional grounds for a plea withdrawal, which she would present in a forthcoming motion.
Adding to Reasons for Withdrawing His Plea
Judge Sullivan provided Powell a Wednesday noon deadline to present any additional arguments. While Powell missed the deadline by 50 minutes due to computer problems, she sought leave to file the late motion yesterday. While Flynn’s original motion to withdraw rested on the government’s breach of the plea agreement, Flynn’s supplemental motion to withdraw his guilty plea relied on Flynn’s claim that his Covington lawyers provided ineffective assistance of counsel.
Flynn’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel proves important, legally, because a court need not allow a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea. Rather, under federal law, a defendant may withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing only “if the defendant can show a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.”
In determining whether a “fair and just reason” exists, courts consider three factors: “(1) whether the defendant has asserted a viable claim of innocence; (2) whether the delay between the guilty plea and the motion to withdraw has substantially prejudiced the government’s ability to prosecute the case; and (3) whether the guilty plea was somehow tainted.”
Powell’s brief walked through these three factors, stressing first that Flynn is innocent of the charge that he lied to the FBI. Powell’s analysis of this factor followed her opening plea to Judge Sullivan to recall that “more than a year ago, at the December 18, 2018, Sentencing Hearing, this Court declared that it could not ‘recall any incident in which the Court has ever accepted a plea of guilty from someone who maintained that he was not guilty,’ and that it did not ‘intend to start’ that day.”
Next, Powell argued that there is no prejudice to the government’s ability to prosecute the case. No witnesses have died, no evidence has been lost, and the prosecution remains equally able to make out its case—if it had one—now as at the time Flynn entered his guilty plea.
Finally, Powell addressed the heart of the issue: the third factor and whether Flynn’s plea was somehow tainted. It was, Powell posited, because of the ineffective assistance of counsel Flynn received both at his December 2017 plea hearing and again when Sullivan quizzed him about his guilt at the December 2018 sentencing hearing.
After setting out the governing legal standard for ineffective assistance of counsel—that “counsel’s advice was not ‘within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases,’ and that as a result he was prejudiced, i.e. ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial’”—Powell dedicates the remaining 30-plus pages of her brief to proving Flynn’s Covington lawyers provided ineffective assistance to Flynn.
Did Michael Flynn Receive Ineffective Counsel?
In arguing that Flynn’s prior attorneys provided ineffective assistance of counsel, Powell first hammers the conflicts of interest facing the Covington lawyers. Here, Powell stresses a mistake she alleges Kelner made in handling the legal work for Flynn’s Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) filings: Kelner inaccurately informed the government that Flynn had initiated an op-ed concerning Turkey, when Flynn had in fact made clear that his business partner, Bijan Rafiekian, had drafted the op-ed.
Powell then notes that internal communications showed the Covington lawyers were discussing “among themselves their own potential civil and criminal FARA liability,” and the “substantial ‘headline risks.’” Simultaneously, it seems from the briefing, the Covington team was looking to market itself and its FARA services following resolution of the Flynn case.
These conflicts, Powell argued, could not be waived. But even if Flynn could have waived Covington’s conflicts of interest, Flynn did not provide an informed consent to allow Covington to continue to represent him, Powell posited.
Here, Powell highlighted some troubling facts. Although Flynn’s Covington lawyer first received a call from special counsel prosecutor Brandon Van Grack on October 31, 2017, demanding a meeting with Flynn’s lawyers, it was not until November 19, 2017, when Covington sent Flynn a written request for him to consent to their representation notwithstanding a “potential” conflict of interest.
Special Counsel Threatens Flynn’s Lawyers
But before then, on November 1, 2017, during a meeting with Covington lawyers, the special counsel highlighted what it saw as Flynn criminal exposure for “(1) FARA (failure to register); (2) FARA false statements; and (3) false statements to government officials.” Van Grack also informed the Covington lawyers of the special counsel’s possible interest in their own testimony.
That letter claimed Covington had already discussed the conflict with Flynn, but the only other time it was raised, according to Flynn, was a passing reference.
“There’s one more issue I want to bring up,” Van Grack said. “Because Covington prepared the FARA registration, that would make you [Kelner] a fact witness.” “If we were to get to that point, we would litigate it very aggressively.” Kelner retorted, “We saw what you guys did with [Paul] Manafort, and we’ll definitely raise it with our client.”
However, according to Flynn’s motion, Kelner did not raise the conflict of interest at that time. Then, after several back-and-forths with the special counsel’s office, Covington arranged for their client to sit down and talk with Robert Mueller’s prosecutors on November 16, 2017. That morning, government lawyer Van Grack called Anthony “to discuss whether they had talked with Mr. Flynn about the conflict.”
In summarizing the call for Kelner, the partner noted there was “Nothing to worry about. They wanted to ask what they’d previously asked: have we considered and disclosed to the client (a) [Kelner]’s potentially being a fact witness and (b) Covington’s own interest with respect to its prior advice to [Flynn] regarding FARA—and that the client is OK proceeding with us? Answer: yes.”
Flynn answered questions for the government for the next two days and then, the afternoon before he was to sit down for the third day of questioning, Covington emailed the request for Flynn’s “informed consent” on its conflict of interest. That letter included the CYA claim that Covington had already discussed the conflict with Flynn, but the only other time it was raised, according to Flynn, was a passing reference to a conflict when his business partner was indicted.
This Was Not Informed Consent
While Flynn responded to Covington’s request for “informed consent” that he was very confident in the team and trusted them, in the motion to withdraw his plea, Powell stresses that the request came too late and was ineffective to inform Flynn of the extent of the conflict. And “absent the actual secret self-interest of Mr. Flynn’s conflicted former counsel: (i) he would have terminated Covington in August 2017; (ii) he would not have gone into the proffer; (iii) he would not have pled guilty in 2017; and, (iv) he would have withdrawn his plea in 2018,” Flynn maintains.
Before Flynn signed the plea, he ‘specifically instructed Anthony and Kelner to call [the Special Counsel] immediately and ask if the agents believed that he lied.’
Beyond the conflict of interest, Powell highlighted several other deficiencies in Covington’s representation, the most serious of which is her claim that the Covington lawyers did not inform Flynn that on November 30, 2017, the day before he pleaded guilty, the special counsel’s office “disclosed to Covington that ‘one of the agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn was being investigated by the DOJ Inspector General’ and had electronic communications that ‘showed a preference for one of the candidates for President.’”
Flynn also asserts that his attorneys did not inform him that the special counsel had just disclosed that “the agents said Mr. Flynn had a ‘sure demeanor,’ and ‘did not give any indicators of deception’ and that the agents ‘had the impression at the time that Mr. Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.’”
Here, Powell also stressed that before Flynn signed the plea, he “specifically instructed Anthony and Kelner to call [the Special Counsel] immediately and ask if the agents believed that he lied. However, when Kelner and Anthony returned to the room where Mr. Flynn was about to sign the plea agreement, they did not inform the Flynns that Van Grack said, ‘both agents said ‘they saw no indication of deception,’ he had ‘a sure demeanor,’ and they ‘did not believe he was lying or he did not believe he was lying.’” Instead, according to Flynn, they said “the agents stood by their statement.”


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Speculation That Mitt Romney Wants To Run In 2024 After Vote For Witnesses

The Washinton Examiner had more : Mitt Romney is stoking suspicions that he is eyeing a third White House bid in 2024 after the Utah Republican broke with his party and insisted on witnesses at President Trump ’ s impeachment trial in the Senate .
Along with centrist Susan Collins of Maine , Romney was one of just two Senate Republicans to join the Democrats in a failed vote to subpoena fresh testimony .
The 2012 Republican presidential nominee might yet acquit Trump on two articles alleging abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , but consistent criticism of Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capped by support for witnesses has some Republicans convinced Romney is jockeying to reclaim the party .
“ Mitt Romney is a bitter , jealous man who looks at President Trump and wishes he could be him .
This is about Romney ’ s ego , nothing else , ” said Jason Miller , a Republican strategist who advised Trump during the 2016 campaign and co-hosts a podcast with Steve Bannon , the president ’ s former White House counselor .
A second Republican strategist neither affiliated with nor opposed to Trump agreed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four-month impeachment process was calculated .
This veteran operative predicted the senator would be active after the November elections , trying to restore the internationalist , “ Chamber of Commerce ” Republicanism that dominated the GOP before the elevation of Trump , a populist and a nationalist .
“ He is cynically betting on an electoral disaster in 2020 , ” this Republican said , requesting anonymity in order to speak candidly and preserve relationships with key establishment figures .
“ I think he believes he will be the only guy who will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the road to hell.
” Prior to the 2016 election and since , Romney has periodically rebuked Trump .
At first , this fueled speculation Romney might challenge the president in the 2020 GOP primary .
Since impeachment , the senator ’ s pointed criticism of Trump ’ s dealings with Ukraine has led some Republicans to believe that he has plans to challenge for control of the party if the president is ousted or after he is termed out of office .
But Republican insiders connected to Romney said in interviews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are misinterpreting his intentions and misunderstanding what he hopes to accomplish with his recently revived political career .
Utah Republicans have mixed feelings about Trump , giving the senator more political latitude to criticize the president and oppose his agenda than almost any other GOP member of Congress .
From the moment he launched his Senate campaign , Romney promised to praise and criticize Trump as warranted .
Romney is simply keeping that promise , said Boyd Matheson , who advised Romney ’ s 2018 bid and is a former chief of staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ He is doing what he said he would do , ” said Matheson , now the opinion editor of the Deseret News in Salt Lake City .
“ He knows the president is transactional , so he isn ’ t worried about a relationship .
He will continue to carve out policy pieces , where he will mostly agree with the president and will call him out on principle or his personal conduct .
”

The Washinton Examiner had more:
Mitt Romney is stoking suspicions that he is eyeing a third White House bid in 2024 after the Utah Republican broke with his party and insisted on witnesses at President Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate.
Along with centrist Susan Collins of Maine, Romney was one of just two Senate Republicans to join the Democrats in a failed vote to subpoena fresh testimony. The 2012 Republican presidential nominee might yet acquit Trump on two articles alleging abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, but consistent criticism of Trump throughout impeachment, a GOP rarity, capped by support for witnesses has some Republicans convinced Romney is jockeying to reclaim the party.
“Mitt Romney is a bitter, jealous man who looks at President Trump and wishes he could be him. This is about Romney’s ego, nothing else,” said Jason Miller, a Republican strategist who advised Trump during the 2016 campaign and co-hosts a podcast with Steve Bannon, the president’s former White House counselor.
A second Republican strategist neither affiliated with nor opposed to Trump agreed that Romney’s maneuvering during the four-month impeachment process was calculated. This veteran operative predicted the senator would be active after the November elections, trying to restore the internationalist, “Chamber of Commerce” Republicanism that dominated the GOP before the elevation of Trump, a populist and a nationalist.
“He is cynically betting on an electoral disaster in 2020,” this Republican said, requesting anonymity in order to speak candidly and preserve relationships with key establishment figures. “I think he believes he will be the only guy who will look like he was in the right on the road to hell.”
Prior to the 2016 election and since, Romney has periodically rebuked Trump. At first, this fueled speculation Romney might challenge the president in the 2020 GOP primary. Since impeachment, the senator’s pointed criticism of Trump’s dealings with Ukraine has led some Republicans to believe that he has plans to challenge for control of the party if the president is ousted or after he is termed out of office.
But Republican insiders connected to Romney said in interviews Friday that the senator’s critics are misinterpreting his intentions and misunderstanding what he hopes to accomplish with his recently revived political career.
Utah Republicans have mixed feelings about Trump, giving the senator more political latitude to criticize the president and oppose his agenda than almost any other GOP member of Congress. From the moment he launched his Senate campaign, Romney promised to praise and criticize Trump as warranted. Romney is simply keeping that promise, said Boyd Matheson, who advised Romney’s 2018 bid and is a former chief of staff to Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.
“He is doing what he said he would do,” said Matheson, now the opinion editor of the Deseret News in Salt Lake City. “He knows the president is transactional, so he isn’t worried about a relationship. He will continue to carve out policy pieces, where he will mostly agree with the president and will call him out on principle or his personal conduct.”


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Rush Limbaugh Announces He Has Advanced Lung Cancer

Transcript as follows ( courtesy of RushLimbaugh.com ) : Ladies and gentlemen , this… This day has been one of the most difficult days in recent memory for me because I ’ ve known this moment was coming in the program today .
Now , I ’ m sure that you all know by now , I really don ’ t like talking about myself , and I don ’ t like making things about me other than in the usual satirical , parodic , joking way .
I like this program to be about you and the things that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one thing that I know that has happened over the 31-plus years of this program is that there has been an incredible bond that has developed between all of you and me .
Now , this program ’ s 31 years old , and in that 31 years , there are people — you hear them call all the time — who have been listening the whole time .
They ’ ve been listening 30 years or 25 years .
I just had somebody say they ’ ve been here three years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ family-type relationship to me , and I ’ ve mentioned to you that this program and this job is what has provided me the greatest satisfaction and happiness that I ’ ve ever experienced , more than I ever thought that I would experience .
So I have to tell you something today that I wish I didn ’ t have to tell you .
It ’ s a struggle for me because I had to inform my staff earlier today .
I can ’ t escape… Even though people are telling me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look at it , I can ’ t help but feel that I ’ m letting everybody down with this .
But the upshot is that I have been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer , diagnosis confirmed by two medical institutions back on January 20th .
I first realized something was wrong on my birthday weekend , January 12th .
I wish I didn ’ t have to tell you this , and I thought about not telling anybody .
I thought about trying to do this without anybody knowing , ’ cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about me .
But there are going to be days that I ’ m not gon na be able to be here because I ’ m undergoing treatment or I ’ m reacting to treatment , and I know that that would inspire all kinds of curiosity with people wondering what ’ s going on .
And the worst thing that can happen is when there is something going on and you try to hide it and cover it up .
It ’ s eventually gon na leak , and then people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t you just say it ?
Why ’ d you try to fool everybody ?
” It ’ s not that I want to fool anybody .
It ’ s just that I don ’ t want to burden anybody with it , and I haven ’ t wanted to .
But it is what it is .
You know me ; I ’ m the mayor of Realville .
So this has happened , and my intention is to come here every day I can and to do this program as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as I do each and every day , because that is the source of my greatest satisfaction professionally , personally .
I ’ ve had so much support from family and friends during this that it ’ s just been tremendous .
I told the staff today that I have a deeply personal relationship with God that I do not proselytize about .
But I do , and I have been working that relationship ( chuckles ) tremendously , which I do regularly anyway , but I ’ ve been focused on it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I know there are many of you in this audience who have experienced this , who are going through it yourselves at the same time .
I am , at the moment , experiencing zero symptoms other than… Look , I don ’ t want to get too detailed in this .
What led to shortness of breath that I thought might have been asthma or — you know , I ’ m 69 — it could have been my heart .
My heart ’ s in great shape , ticking away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It was not that .
It was a pulmonary problem involving malignancy .
So I ’ m gon na be gone the next couple days as we figure out the treatment course of action and have further testing done .
But as I said , I ’ m gon na be here as often as I can .
And as is the case with everybody who finds themselves in this circumstance , you just want to push ahead and try to keep everything as normal as you can , which is something that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do .
But I felt that I had to tell you because that ’ s the kind of relationship I feel like I have with those of you in this audience .
I say it every Christmas , which is what I feel more thankful than as Thanksgiving .
And I feel thankful at Thanksgiving , but Christmas it really gets to me .
But over the years , a lot of people have been very nice telling me how much this program has meant to them .
But whatever that is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all have meant to me .
And I can ’ t describe this .
But I know you ’ re there every day .
I can see you .
It ’ s strange how , but I know you ’ re there .
I know you ’ re there in great numbers , and I know that you understand everything I say .
The rest of the world may not when they hear it expressed a different way , but I know that you do .
You ’ ve been one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve had in my life .
So I hope I will be talking about this as little as necessary in the coming days .
But we ’ ve got a great bunch of doctors , a great team assembled .
We ’ re at full-speed ahead on this , and it ’ s just now a matter of implementing what we are gon na be told later this week .
So I ’ ll be back here .
I hope I ’ ll be back Thursday .
If not , it will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that every day I ’ m not here , I ’ ll be thinking about you and missing you .
Thank you very much .

Transcript as follows (courtesy of RushLimbaugh.com):
Ladies and gentlemen, this… This day has been one of the most difficult days in recent memory for me because I’ve known this moment was coming in the program today. Now, I’m sure that you all know by now, I really don’t like talking about myself, and I don’t like making things about me other than in the usual satirical, parodic, joking way.
I like this program to be about you and the things that matter to all of us. The one thing that I know that has happened over the 31-plus years of this program is that there has been an incredible bond that has developed between all of you and me. Now, this program’s 31 years old, and in that 31 years, there are people — you hear them call all the time — who have been listening the whole time. They’ve been listening 30 years or 25 years.
I just had somebody say they’ve been here three years. But, whatever, it is a family-type relationship to me, and I’ve mentioned to you that this program and this job is what has provided me the greatest satisfaction and happiness that I’ve ever experienced, more than I ever thought that I would experience. So I have to tell you something today that I wish I didn’t have to tell you.
It’s a struggle for me because I had to inform my staff earlier today. I can’t escape… Even though people are telling me it’s not the way to look at it, I can’t help but feel that I’m letting everybody down with this. But the upshot is that I have been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer, diagnosis confirmed by two medical institutions back on January 20th. I first realized something was wrong on my birthday weekend, January 12th.
I wish I didn’t have to tell you this, and I thought about not telling anybody. I thought about trying to do this without anybody knowing, ’cause I don’t like making things about me. But there are going to be days that I’m not gonna be able to be here because I’m undergoing treatment or I’m reacting to treatment, and I know that that would inspire all kinds of curiosity with people wondering what’s going on.
And the worst thing that can happen is when there is something going on and you try to hide it and cover it up. It’s eventually gonna leak, and then people are gonna say, “Why didn’t you just say it? Why’d you try to fool everybody? ” It’s not that I want to fool anybody. It’s just that I don’t want to burden anybody with it, and I haven’t wanted to. But it is what it is. You know me; I’m the mayor of Realville.
So this has happened, and my intention is to come here every day I can and to do this program as normally and as competently and as expertly as I do each and every day, because that is the source of my greatest satisfaction professionally, personally. I’ve had so much support from family and friends during this that it’s just been tremendous. I told the staff today that I have a deeply personal relationship with God that I do not proselytize about.
But I do, and I have been working that relationship (chuckles) tremendously, which I do regularly anyway, but I’ve been focused on it intensely for the past couple of weeks. I know there are many of you in this audience who have experienced this, who are going through it yourselves at the same time. I am, at the moment, experiencing zero symptoms other than… Look, I don’t want to get too detailed in this.
What led to shortness of breath that I thought might have been asthma or — you know, I’m 69 — it could have been my heart. My heart’s in great shape, ticking away fine, squeezing and pumping great. It was not that. It was a pulmonary problem involving malignancy. So I’m gonna be gone the next couple days as we figure out the treatment course of action and have further testing done. But as I said, I’m gonna be here as often as I can.
And as is the case with everybody who finds themselves in this circumstance, you just want to push ahead and try to keep everything as normal as you can, which is something that I’m going to try to do. But I felt that I had to tell you because that’s the kind of relationship I feel like I have with those of you in this audience. I say it every Christmas, which is what I feel more thankful than as Thanksgiving.
And I feel thankful at Thanksgiving, but Christmas it really gets to me. But over the years, a lot of people have been very nice telling me how much this program has meant to them. But whatever that is, it pales in comparison to what you all have meant to me. And I can’t describe this. But I know you’re there every day. I can see you. It’s strange how, but I know you’re there.
I know you’re there in great numbers, and I know that you understand everything I say. The rest of the world may not when they hear it expressed a different way, but I know that you do. You’ve been one of the greatest sources of confidence that I’ve had in my life. So I hope I will be talking about this as little as necessary in the coming days.
But we’ve got a great bunch of doctors, a great team assembled. We’re at full-speed ahead on this, and it’s just now a matter of implementing what we are gonna be told later this week. So I’ll be back here. I hope I’ll be back Thursday. If not, it will be as soon as I can — and know that every day I’m not here, I’ll be thinking about you and missing you. Thank you very much.


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Franklin Graham: Super Bowl Halftime Show Was ‘Sexual Exploitation of Women’

Franklin Graham just came out and said what a lot of us have been thinking .
That Super Bowl halftime @ @ @ @ @ or empowering or great entertainment….it was sexual exploitation of women at its worst .
How @ @ @ @ @ grabs and humping hips do we need to see ?
Oh , and don ’ @ @ @ @ @ pole right in the center .

Franklin Graham just came out and said what a lot of us have been thinking.
That Super Bowl halftime show wasn’t bold or empowering or great entertainment….it was sexual exploitation of women at its worst.
How many bare asses, crotch grabs and humping hips do we need to see?
Oh, and don’t forget the giant stripper pole right in the center.
It was a disgrace!


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Andy Reid Absolutely Going To The White House:  “It’s Quite an Honor”

Here 's more , from The Hill : Kansas City Chiefs coach Andy Reid says he would agree to visit the White House to celebrate his team ’ s Super Bowl victory if President Trumpextends an invitation .
While speaking to reporters shortly after the Chiefs ' victory on Sunday night , Reid said he “ hadn ’ t even thought ” about the potential visit .
“ I ’ ll be there .
If they ’ re inviting us , I ’ ll be there .
It ’ s quite an honor , I think , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he thinks it “ would be great to go to the White House , ” according to The Kansas City Star .
“ I ’ ve never been to D.C. , so that would be great , ” he added .
Chiefs defensive end Frank Clark , however , was less committal following the team 's 31-20 victory over the San Francisco 49ers in Super Bowl 54 .
“ It ’ s a lot of stuff going on surrounding the White House and stuff like that , ” Clark said , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ... that ’ s something you do as a Super Bowl champion .
But we ’ ll see , man .
It ’ s a lot of mixed emotions about stuff going on there.
” Cornerback Bashaud Breeland and safety Tyrann Mathieu also weighed in on the matter .
“ It ’ s going to come — we ’ re Super Bowl champions , ” Breeland said .
“ We ’ ll cross that bridge when we cross it .
We had to get this game down first , and now we know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the White House.
” Mathieu added , “ I ’ m here to represent the Kansas City Chiefs .
I think my teammates feel the same way .
Any time we get the opportunity to represent Kansas City the right way , represent our teammates the right way , I don ’ t see any wrong in that.
” Though it is a tradition for championship U.S. sports teams to visit the White House following their title games , the practice has become a source of controversy since Trump has taken office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Philadelphia Eagles , pointing to some of their players ' participation in demonstrations during the national anthem before games .
The move by Trump also came following reports that some of the team ’ s players were planning to skip the visit .

Here's more, from The Hill:
Kansas City Chiefs coach Andy Reid says he would agree to visit the White House to celebrate his team’s Super Bowl victory if President Trumpextends an invitation.
While speaking to reporters shortly after the Chiefs' victory on Sunday night, Reid said he “hadn’t even thought” about the potential visit.
“I’ll be there. If they’re inviting us, I’ll be there. It’s quite an honor, I think,” he said.
Wide receiver Tyreek Hill also said he thinks it “would be great to go to the White House,” according to The Kansas City Star.
“I’ve never been to D.C., so that would be great,” he added.
Chiefs defensive end Frank Clark, however, was less committal following the team's 31-20 victory over the San Francisco 49ers in Super Bowl 54.
“It’s a lot of stuff going on surrounding the White House and stuff like that,” Clark said, according to the Star. “I know historically ... that’s something you do as a Super Bowl champion. But we’ll see, man. It’s a lot of mixed emotions about stuff going on there.”
“We’ll see,” he added again.
Cornerback Bashaud Breeland and safety Tyrann Mathieu also weighed in on the matter.
“It’s going to come — we’re Super Bowl champions,” Breeland said. “We’ll cross that bridge when we cross it. We had to get this game down first, and now we know [we] got a trip going to the White House.”
Mathieu added, “I’m here to represent the Kansas City Chiefs. I think my teammates feel the same way. Any time we get the opportunity to represent Kansas City the right way, represent our teammates the right way, I don’t see any wrong in that.”
Though it is a tradition for championship U.S. sports teams to visit the White House following their title games, the practice has become a source of controversy since Trump has taken office.
In 2018, Trump disinvited the Philadelphia Eagles, pointing to some of their players' participation in demonstrations during the national anthem before games. The move by Trump also came following reports that some of the team’s players were planning to skip the visit.


welovetrump--2020-02-03--49ers Sherman Doubted He’d Go To White House, Now The Chiefs Can Go Instead!

File this under “ careful what you wish for ” !
Either works for me .
Before the big game @ @ @ @ @ Sherman made clear he does not like President Trump and said he doubted he ’ @ @ @ @ @ House if they won .
In contrast , Chief ’ s star Frank Clark wore @ @ @ @ @ press conference and had fun with it .
Now as I said a couple days @ @ @ @ @ t really tell if he ’ s pro-Trump , anti-Trump or just having fun messing @ @ @ @ @ think it might be option # 3 .
But any guy who wears a Trump @ @ @ @ @ is ok in my book and he seems like a cool dude from this video @

File this under “careful what you wish for”!
Or under “poetic justice”.
Either works for me.
Before the big game, the 49ers star Richard Sherman made clear he does not like President Trump and said he doubted he’d go to the White House if they won.
In contrast, Chief’s star Frank Clark wore a Trump-Kanye shirt to a press conference and had fun with it.
Now as I said a couple days ago, I can’t really tell if he’s pro-Trump, anti-Trump or just having fun messing with the Media.
I think it might be option #3.
But any guy who wears a Trump shirt to a press conference is ok in my book and he seems like a cool dude from this video.


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Jeb Bush Says Halftime Show Was The “Best Ever”

Once again , I find myself not in agreement with Jeb Bush .
I watched that Super Bowl Halftime show @ @ @ @ @ J-Lo and it seemed to me like something you might see in a trashy strip @ @ @ @ @ and other body parts hanging out and thrusting your hips over and over and twirling @ @ @ @ @ ?
This is what passes for a Super Bowl halftime show now ?
I wasn @ @ @ @ @ was supposed to clap , turn the TV off , or throw dollar bills at @ @ @ @ @ it was bad when my 3-year old said “ Daddy , I can see her @ @ @ @ @ s like the old story of the Emperor who had no clothes .
They put @ @ @ @ @ TV and tell us how artistic it is and we ’ re all supposed to @ @ @ @ @ Yet even a 3-year old knows trashy when they see it .
But good old @ @ @ @ @ party line….
” Best halftime show ever ” .

Once again, I find myself not in agreement with Jeb Bush.
I watched that Super Bowl Halftime show last night featuring Shakira and J-Lo and it seemed to me like something you might see in a trashy strip club.
Is this “women’s empowerment”?
Scantily clad butts and other body parts hanging out and thrusting your hips over and over and twirling around on a stripper pole?
This is what passes for a Super Bowl halftime show now?
I wasn’t sure whether I was supposed to clap, turn the TV off, or throw dollar bills at the screen!
I knew it was bad when my 3-year old said “Daddy, I can see her butt!”
It’s like the old story of the Emperor who had no clothes.
They put a strip show on national TV and tell us how artistic it is and we’re all supposed to applaud and praise it.
Yet even a 3-year old knows trashy when they see it.
But good old Jeb dutifully tweeted out the party line….”Best halftime show ever”.
Ok Jeb.


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Jay Z and Beyonce Refuse To Stand During The National Anthem

MSN had more on the reaction : Beyoncé and JAY-Z chose not to stand during the National Anthem at this year 's Super Bowl and Twitter has many thoughts .
The couple , along with their daughter , Blue Ivy , were photographed sitting during Demi Lovato 's performance of `` The Star-Spangled Banner '' ahead of Sunday 's big game at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens , Florida .
While they were far from the only ones who chose not to stand during the performance , many outspoken Twitter users felt they were trying to make a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Colin Kaepernick and others who famously took a knee during the anthem as a peaceful protest against police brutality .
Others pointed out that , if it were a political statement on the family 's behalf , it comes at an unexpected time considering the fact that JAY-Z recently partnered with the NFL to collaborate on entertainment events -- including the star-studded halftime show .
Whether they meant anything by their choice to remain seated during the anthem , Twitter still had a lot of feelings about it .
Kaepernick himself -- @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to watch the Super Bowl or support the NFL -- shared a screenshot posted by another user who seemingly implied JAY-Z was being hypocritical for sitting during the anthem after partnering with the NFL despite their handling of National Anthem protests in the league .
Meanwhile , others defended Beyoncé and JAY-Z , arguing that they were within their rights to choose whether or not to stand during the National Anthem .
Many also felt that critics were making a big deal out of nothing in an effort to attack the couple 's @ @

Here we go again.
This country is so injust, isn’t it?
Where else can two minorities rise from nothing to make billions of dollars and become world-wide famous?
What exactly are they protesting anyway?
Cameras caught the pair and their child Blue Ivy sitting in chairs as the camera pans from the National Anthem singer to them and back again, making clear this is not photoshopped or taken out of context.
So sad to see.
If they don’t like our country, why are they here?


welovetrump--2020-02-03--Sean Hannity Interviews President Trump Before The Super Bowl

In an exclusive interview with Fox News ' Sean Hannity during the Super Bowl LIV pregame show , President Trump confirmed that the State of the Union address would go ahead as scheduled on Tuesday -- just a day before the Senate is set to overwhelmingly acquit him after a months-long impeachment process .
`` I think she 's a very confused , very nervous woman , '' Trump said , referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif , who reluctantly announced impeachment proceedings last year after months of resisting the progressive wing of her party .
`` I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , '' Trump continued .
`` I think she really knew what was going to happen , and her worst nightmare has happened .
I do n't think she 's gon na be there too long , either .
I think that the radical left -- and she 's sorta radical left too , by the way -- but I think the radical left is gon na take over . ''
The president cited the personal cost of the multiple investigations that have taken place during his administration , saying the media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` the good stuff '' to focus on invented scandals .
`` Well , it 's been very unfair .
From the day I won ... from the day I came down from the escalator .
... it probably started from there .
It 's been a very , very unfair process , '' Trump said .
`` The Mueller Report , Russia , Russia , Russia , as you say , which was total nonsense -- it was all nonsense , the whole thing .
It was very unfair , and mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I mean , my family suffered because of all this .
And many other families suffered also . ''
But , Trump said , his supporters would remain undeterred .
READ MORE : Why Do So Many Politicians and Celebrities Have Black Eyes ?
`` There 's a revolution going on in this country , and I mean a positive revolution , '' Trump said , noting that unemployment rates have plummeted among minority groups .
The president also asserted that the Democratic National Committee ( DNC ) was `` rigging the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders and candidates such as Sen. Cory Booker , D-N.J. , after the DNC announced it would change debate rules in a way that would help Mike Bloomberg appear on stage .
As Trump spoke , an NBC News report indicated that former Secretary of State John Kerry was overheard in Iowa discussing getting in the presidential race , as a last-ditch effort to blunt Sanders ' surge in the polls and prevent him from `` taking down '' the Democratic Party .
( Kerry , firing off a since-deleted , highly uncharacteristic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not running for president , but did n't deny the NBC News report . )
Asked what he felt about Bloomberg , Trump did n't hold back .
`` Uh , very little .
I just think of little , '' Trump said .
`` You know , now he wants a box for the debates to stand on .
OK , it ’ s OK , there ’ s nothing wrong .
You can be short .
Why should he get a box to stand on , OK ?
He wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should he be entitled to that ?
Really .
Does that mean everyone else gets a box ?
...
I would love to run against Bloomberg . ''

Fox News reports:
In an exclusive interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity during the Super Bowl LIV pregame show, President Trump confirmed that the State of the Union address would go ahead as scheduled on Tuesday -- just a day before the Senate is set to overwhelmingly acquit him after a months-long impeachment process.
"I think she's a very confused, very nervous woman," Trump said, referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, who reluctantly announced impeachment proceedings last year after months of resisting the progressive wing of her party.
"I don't think she wanted to do this," Trump continued. "I think she really knew what was going to happen, and her worst nightmare has happened. I don't think she's gonna be there too long, either. I think that the radical left -- and she's sorta radical left too, by the way -- but I think the radical left is gonna take over."
The president cited the personal cost of the multiple investigations that have taken place during his administration, saying the media is deliberately ignoring historic economic numbers and "the good stuff" to focus on invented scandals.
"Her worst nightmare has happened." — President Trump on Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
"Well, it's been very unfair. From the day I won ... from the day I came down from the escalator. ... it probably started from there. It's been a very, very unfair process," Trump said. "The Mueller Report, Russia, Russia, Russia, as you say, which was total nonsense -- it was all nonsense, the whole thing. It was very unfair, and mostly it was unfair to my family. I mean, my family suffered because of all this. And many other families suffered also."
But, Trump said, his supporters would remain undeterred.
READ MORE: Why Do So Many Politicians and Celebrities Have Black Eyes?
"There's a revolution going on in this country, and I mean a positive revolution," Trump said, noting that unemployment rates have plummeted among minority groups.
The president also asserted that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) was "rigging the election again" against "crazy" Bernie Sanders and candidates such as Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., after the DNC announced it would change debate rules in a way that would help Mike Bloomberg appear on stage.
As Trump spoke, an NBC News report indicated that former Secretary of State John Kerry was overheard in Iowa discussing getting in the presidential race, as a last-ditch effort to blunt Sanders' surge in the polls and prevent him from "taking down" the Democratic Party. (Kerry, firing off a since-deleted, highly uncharacteristic profanity on Twitter, then insisted he was not running for president, but didn't deny the NBC News report.)
Asked what he felt about Bloomberg, Trump didn't hold back.
"Uh, very little. I just think of little," Trump said. "You know, now he wants a box for the debates to stand on. OK, it’s OK, there’s nothing wrong. You can be short. Why should he get a box to stand on, OK? He wants a box for the debates. Why should he be entitled to that? Really. Does that mean everyone else gets a box? ... I would love to run against Bloomberg."


welovetrump--2020-03-30--Here’s How To Find Your FREE Trump Hat

Here’s How To Find Your FREE Trump Hat

When you joined our Trump Facebook Group , I asked if you wanted a FREE Trump hat .
If you @ @ @ @ @ , an email has already been sent to you !
Some of the tech companies @ @ @ @ @ starts with a G and ends with Mail ) don ’ t like Trump and @ @ @ @ @ our message .
And they like to send our message to your Spam Folder .
@ @ @ @ @ see our email already waiting for you in your Inbox , here ’ s how @ @ @ @ @ your FREE hat !
Just tap here and follow these instructions to find our email @ @ @ @ @ .
And thanks for helping us fight back against the Big Tech censorship !
With @ @ @ @ @ continue to get our pro-Trump message to the people .
Thank you so much !
@ @ @ @ @ instructions : HERE ’ S HOW TO FIND YOUR FREE HAT EMAIL FROM US

Hi there!
Noah here.
When you joined our Trump Facebook Group, I asked if you wanted a FREE Trump hat.
If you gave me your email address, an email has already been sent to you!
BUT here’s the deal….
Some of the tech companies (like the one that starts with a G and ends with “oogle”) don’t like Trump and they don’t like our message.
So if your email service starts with G and ends in “mail” there’s a good chance you might never see our email.
Poof.
Gone.
Filtered.
Like it never existed.
They like to send our messages to your Spam Folder.
But we can fight back.
So….here’s the deal.
If you don’t see our email already waiting for you in your Inbox, here’s how to find it and claim your FREE hat!
Just tap here and follow these instructions to find our email.
And once you do that, our emails will land in your Inbox every time!
You win, Trump wins, Big Tech loses.
Thanks for being here….
And thanks for helping us fight back against the Big Tech censorship!
With your help, we can continue to get our pro-Trump message to the people.
Thank you so much!
Oh, and if you never signed up for a Free Trump Hat and want to get an email from us, that’s no problem, you can SIGN UP HERE .
Ok, that’s it.
Here are those instructions again if you need them:
HERE’S HOW TO FIND YOUR FREE HAT EMAIL FROM US
Your friend,
Noah


welovetrump--2020-03-29--President Trump: Harry and Meghan Will NOT Get Free Secret Service Protection In USA

Meghan and Harry may have no choice but to speak with President Trump to ask if they can have “ diplomatic protection ” in the US according to the Mail Online .
The POTUS now holds the power to decide whether to grant the Sussexes security agents for their new Hollywood lifestyle .
As of the 31 of March , Meghan and Harry will no longer be classed as 'international protected ' as the pair complete their step down as senior royals .
If the pair had remained part of the royal family , they would have been entitled to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carry weapons .
However , as Harry and Meghan will be quitting the firm , the lines are blurry as to whether they are permitted that privilege any longer .
A source told the Mail : “ It will be down to Harry or his Met Police protection officers to ask for help .
“ There is a reciprocal agreement between the US that allows protection officers to carry their weapons .
But Harry is no longer a serving royal and that is why his protection in Canada from the Mounties was withdrawn @

Express.co reported:
Meghan and Harry may have no choice but to speak with President Trump to ask if they can have “diplomatic protection” in the US according to the Mail Online. The POTUS now holds the power to decide whether to grant the Sussexes security agents for their new Hollywood lifestyle.
As of the 31 of March, Meghan and Harry will no longer be classed as 'international protected' as the pair complete their step down as senior royals.
If the pair had remained part of the royal family, they would have been entitled to secret service agents that are allowed to carry weapons.
However, as Harry and Meghan will be quitting the firm, the lines are blurry as to whether they are permitted that privilege any longer.
A source told the Mail: “It will be down to Harry or his Met Police protection officers to ask for help.
“There is a reciprocal agreement between the US that allows protection officers to carry their weapons. But Harry is no longer a serving royal and that is why his protection in Canada from the Mounties was withdrawn.


welovetrump--2020-03-28--Science Experts Quietly Admit President Trump’s Actions Are Saving Lives During Coronavirus Epidemic

Like everything else , it was only a matter of time before the coronavirus would become politicized .
Democratic presidential @ @ @ @ @ the media are claiming that President Trump isn ’ t doing enough to protect Americans @ @ @ @ @ are even some who claim that our federal government isn ’ t prepared to handle @ @ @ @ @ Earlier this week , AOC went as far as to say that Vice President Pence @ @ @ @ @ task force in charge of fighting the outbreak .
While Democrats are criticizing the president @ @ @ @ @ overlooked ( if not ignored ) by the media .
His actions are actively saving @ @ @ @ @ epidemic .
See more details below :

Like everything else, it was only a matter of time before the coronavirus would become politicized.
Democratic presidential candidates and their friends in the media are claiming that President Trump isn’t doing enough to protect Americans from the coronavirus.
There are even some who claim that our federal government isn’t prepared to handle the spread of coronavirus.
Earlier this week, AOC went as far as to say that Vice President Pence is unqualified to lead the task force in charge of fighting the outbreak.
While Democrats are criticizing the president, scientists comments are being overlooked (if not ignored) by the media.
Trump was right.
Again.
His actions are actively saving American lives during the coronavirus epidemic.
See more details below: